Resolving constraint conflicts

Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies (SACMAT 2002)

Volumn 9, Issue , 2004, Pages 105-114

  Jaeger, Trent ^a   Sailer, Reiner ^a   Zhang, Xiaolan ^a  

^a IBM T J WATSON RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Access control models; Constraint models; Policy design

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS; CONSTRAINT THEORY; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PUBLIC POLICY;

ACCESS CONTROL MODELS; CONSTRAINT CONFLICTS; CONSTRAINT MODELS; POLICY DESIGN;

SECURITY OF DATA;

EID: 4143132099     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/990036.990053     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. G.-J. Ahn and R.Sandhu. Role-based authorization constraints specification. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), 3(4), Nov 2000.
2. L. Badger, D. F. Sterne, D. L. Sherman, K. M. Walker, and S. A. Haghighat. A Domain and Type Enforcement UNIX prototype. In Proceedings of the 1995 USENIX Security Symposium, 1995.
3. D. Bell and L. LaPadula. Secure Computer Systems: Mathematical Foundations (Volume 1). Mitre Technical Report, ESD-TR-73-278, 1973.
4. S. Benferhat, R. El Baida, F. Cuppens. A stratification-based approach for handling conflicts in access control. In Proceedings of the 8 Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, 2003.
5. K. J. Biba. Integrity considerations for secure computer systems. Technical Report MTR-3153, Mitre Corporation, Mitre Corp, Bedford MA, June 1975.
6. th National Computer Security Conference, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1985.
7. D. D. Clark and D. R. Wilson. A comparison of commercial and military computer security policies. In Proceedings of the 1987 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 1987.
8. th Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, 2003.
9. th Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, 2003.
10. E. Ferrari and B. Thuraisingham. Secure database systems. In O. Diaz and M. Piattini, editors, Advanced Databases: Technology and Design, 2000.
11. T. Fraser. LOMAC: Low Water-Mark Integrity Protection for COTS Environments. In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2000.
12. T. Jaeger and J. E. Tidswell. Practical safety in flexible access control models. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), 4(2), May 2001.
13. T. Jaeger, A. Edwards, and X. Zhang. The access control spaces model. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC), 6(3), August 2003.
14. th USENIX Security Symposium, August 2003.
15. S. Jajodia and P. Samarati and V. S. Subrahmanian. A logical language for expressing authorizations. In Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 1997.
16. LinuxSecurity.com Advisories. www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/ turbolinux_advisory-587.html, July 2000.
17. P. McDaniel and A. Prakash. Methods and limitations in security policy reconciliation. In Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2002.
18. National Security Agency. Security-Enhanced Linux (SELinux). http://www.nsa.gov/selinux, 2003.
19. J. Ramsdell. SELinux Analysis Tools www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ramsdell/tools/ selinux/slat-1.0.1.tar.gz, 2003.
20. S. Smalley and T. Fraser. A security policy configuration for Security-Enhanced Linux. Available at http://www.nsa.gov/selinux, 2003.
21. Tresys Technology. Security-Enhanced Linux research. www.tresys.com/ selinux.html, 2003.
22. H. B. Wang, S. Jha, P. McDaniel and M. Livny. Security policy reconciliation in distributed computing environments. To appear in Proceedings of 5th International Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks, June 2004.
23. C. Wright, C. Cowan, S. Smalley, J. Morris, and G. Kroah-Hartman. Linux Security Modules: General security support for the Linux kernel. Proceedings of the Eleventh USENIX Security Symposium, August 2002.